(Prolifer)ations 9-7-10
by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN
- We’d like to welcome Secular Pro-Life and Bound4Life to our blogroll. Pro-Life Wisconsin has also been added to our blogroll and Top Sites, and we welcome more of your recommendations!
- Mark Crutcher points out the power of the brain to self delude, citing abortionist Richard Grossman, who claimed life begins when a woman decides it begins. Mark counters, “What if there’s a woman who sincerely believes that life doesn’t begin until speech is possible and she kills her 3-month-old daughter. Should she be charged with murder?”
- ProWomanProLife reports NARAL gives MD an “A” in reproductive rights for late-term abortion, protecting abortionists from legal action, abortions on minors without parental notice, and lack of conscience laws for health care workers. I wonder if that “A” also includes the fact that “MD health officials have ordered two doctors to stop performing abortions after a woman was critically injured during a procedure last month.”
- Culture Campaign informs readers how China has welcomed an abstinence curriculum created by Focus on the Family. A former Chinese secretary general of media remarked, “Abstinence is good for keeping the families steady and bringing down the divorce rate. And it complies with China’s traditional morals.”
- Wesley J. Smith points out how the media romanticizes even murder/suicide situations and makes them into “ads” for assisted suicide.He also notes how the upcoming World Suicide Prevention Day on September 10 seems to send mixed messages.
The world only seeks to prevent suicide unless one is terminally ill, disabled, elderly and “tired of life,” a disabled baby in the Netherlands/Belgium, or a person seeking “suicide tourism” in Switzerland.
- National Pro-Life Radio shines the light on an abstinence study, yet unreleased by HHS. Many speculate that the reason for the delay is because the results “[do] not support the [Obama] administration’s objective… of eliminating all abstinence-education funding.”
- American Papist reports Notre Dame has terminated Bill Kirk, the only senior administrator to attend the counter rally when President Obama gave the commencement speech last year. His wife was an advisor to a pro-life club on campus. The Kirks, adoptive parents of 2 toddlers, were in the process of adopting a 3rd child.
- Bryan Kemper has a contest going for a “Tough Questions” Series he is writing. Click here to see some of the topics already covered.
Sep.07, 2010 3:30 pm |
Blogs |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t Maryland have the highest abortion rate in the country as well?
Oh goodie, more playmates!
‘the power of the brain to self delude’ – that would explain faith then.
China will nod and smile at anything that someone else pays for.
Yes, they want suicide to be a reasoned decision, not caused by depression or temporary situations. Terminal illnesses and such are different. That’d be that ‘choice’ thing again.
Abstinence – santorum!
‘Tough questions’? I think you mean loaded questions. Or questions phrased such that people can’t actually answer as they truly wish to.
‘the power of the brain to self delude’ – that would explain faith then.
Hooray. Another anti-religious bigot.
Tough questions’? I think you mean loaded questions. Or questions phrased such that people can’t actually answer as they truly wish to.
You might want to work on your reading comprehension
Mods, does calling faith the power to self-delude fall under the blasphemy clause above? This is getting REALLY old.
On what basis do you ascribe the word ‘bigot’ Lucy?
Nothing wrong with my comprehension, I read the pieces. They are all opinionated and use their own self-supporting suppositions.
Elisabeth, in what regard do you couch those who insist that either islam, buddhism, greek gods or jehovahs witnesses are the true faith and the one everyone should follow?
Believers in a different faith than mine. You have slammed all believers of all tenets and it is getting old.
Mods, does calling faith the power to self-delude fall under the blasphemy clause above? This is getting REALLY old.
Probably not. (And I agree, it’s getting old.) Cranium, I’ve noted most of your comments here are religiously inflammatory (deliberately inflammatory, which IS against the rules) and not related to the pro-life issue. Tone it down, please. Surely you can do that and debate civilly?
Oh all right. Sorry Kel.
The point I was trying to make is that every faith insists that it is the one and only true way/light/whatever. Therefore someone must be deluded. Does Elisabeth believe that all other faiths are as correct and true as hers? Do you Elisabeth? How does that work then?
I’d still like to know on what basis I have been called a bigot. I’m not offended Kel/Mod, firstly because it’s not true and secondly because I really don’t much care what people call me – it’s either funny or it’s inaccurate, so neither wounds.
I didn’t call you a bigot, so I’m not sure what you’re talking about.
The point I was trying to make is that every faith insists that it is the one and only true way/light/whatever.
Kinda like atheism? Their way is the only true way, everyone else is nuts…
There is a difference between my thinking that someone is wrong and thinking that someone is self-deluded. In addition, you called “faith” self-delusion…. thereby calling ALL faith and all people of faith self-deluded.
I can disagree with the conclusions that someone has come to and not believe or claim that they are “deluded”. The word has both a connotation and a denotation that is unnecessarily provocative and rude.
My best friend in the entire world is LDS. Her mother helped to raise me when I was a young child and my mother had cancer. I know in great detail what she believes and why. I happen to believe she is wrong but I have the utmost of respect for her as a person and in no way believe that she is deluded.
No you didn’t Kel, Lucy did. You’ll see I asked the question of Lucy earlier.
There are a couple of sayings which may assist in explaining my point:
‘we are both atheist, I just believe in one less god than you do’ and ‘once you understand why you don’t believe in other peoples’ gods you’ll understand why I don’t believe in yours’.
The point being, if you give other faiths the same credit as your own, what does that say about your faith and your belief in it? Or, are people of other faiths dishonest, stupid or deluded because yours IS the only true one?
Once again, it is possible to believe that someone is wrong without calling them self-deluded. There is a level of respect for other human beings that you regularly demonstrate a disdain for and lack of ability to exhibit.
This only makes sense that you are incapable of respecting other human beings who differ in their opinion from you… you are willing to have murdered human beings who differ from you in their stage of development.
I didn’t call you a bigot, so I’m not sure what you’re talking about.
Cranium was referring to one of my comments, Kel. One that I do not apologize for.
I’d still like to know on what basis I have been called a bigot.
Read my comment again, cranium. Then read yours (the one I replied to). If you still don’t get it, then I’m not going to bother explaining it. At the very least, you have been very disrespectful to religious/faithful people. By the way, I’m agnostic. But, I have people in my life who do have faith. So, I don’t tolerate people who bash others for having faith in their lives.
and secondly because I really don’t much care what people call me
That contradicts your above quote.
‘That contradicts your above quote’ – not at all Lucy, I merely asked why you cast that aspersion.
A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, irrationality, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.
The origin of the word bigot and bigoterie in English dates back to at least 1598, via Middle French, and started with the sense of “religious hypocrite“.
Now lets see – I’m not attempting to stop people believing in god (although I will point out what I see as the absurdity), I’m not attempting to stop people going to church, I’m not attempting to force people to have sex before marriage, I’m not attempting to force people to use contraception, I’m not attempting to force anyone to have an abortion, I’m not attempting to force anyone to be homosexual. What I am attempting to do is stop people from trying to force their believes and behaviors on others.
I may be disrespectful, I may even be insulting. I will certainly proffer my opinion and try to inform – but I don’t force people to follow my way of living. That’s the fundamental difference.
So you tell me Lucy.
That contradicts your above quote’ – not at all Lucy, I merely asked why you cast that aspersion.
Why?
A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, irrationality, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs.
So you tell me Lucy.
Sure. I’ll tell you that definition fits you quite well, at least from what I’ve seen on this blog. Your behavior here certainly hasn’t done you any credit.
What I am attempting to do is stop people from trying to force their believes and behaviors on others.
So you support right of conscience laws?
I may be disrespectful, I may even be insulting.
So, you shouldn’t mind a taste of your own medicine :)
I will certainly proffer my opinion and try to inform – but I don’t force people to follow my way of living.
Not all bigots do.
Why? – because I believe there are others around here who fit the description much better than I do, as I explained.
So, you shouldn’t mind a taste of your own medicine – not at all, knock yourself out!
Not all bigots do – yet what are you doing?
I’d say she’s calling a spade a spade…
Yes, well maybe she should focus on doing some digging with that spade Elisabeth, then she might actually find something that supports her case.
Um, you’re the spade. You really want her to dig with you??
because I believe there are others around here who fit the description much better than I do, as I explained.
You mean some of the other pro-abort trolls who come here to harass us?
yet what are you doing?
Please refer to Elisabeth’s excellent reply :)
Yes, well maybe she should focus on doing some digging with that spade Elisabeth, then she might actually find something that supports her case.
No need for digging. The evidence is glaringly obvious in your original comment.
Oh really?
n] (ethnic slur) offensive name for a Black person;
http://www.hyperdictionary.com/search.aspx?define=spade
Well I am digging for the truth for her Elisabeth, so in a way, yes. I’d be happy for her to help.
Hoe droll Lucy. Did you read the full meaning of ‘bigot’ or not? I think it speaks for itself, as do your words.
‘Elisabeth’s excellent reply’ – where would that be then? I’ve not seen anything that comes close to that description.
Again, read the meaning and do some self-reflecting.
Mods, once again, Cranium is coming VERY close to violating the guidelines. He offers nothing in the way of discourse but simply sits and makes slams about the persons posting. Is there anything we can do about this?
I get accused of being a bigot.
I get called a pro-abort troll.
I get called spade – on whatever level
Your last two posts contained nothing more than basic ‘slams’ Elisabeth.
I think it’s tit for tat really. But I will endevour to not overstep the mark.
I get accused of being a bigot.
If you don’t like it, then don’t act like one.
I get called a pro-abort troll.
See above.
Did you read the full meaning of ‘bigot’ or not? I think it speaks for itself, as do your words.
Did you actually read it? Because, yes, it certainly does speak for itself. As do your comments.
Well I am digging for the truth for her Elisabeth, so in a way, yes. I’d be happy for her to help.
Once again: No digging required. The evidence is glaringly obvious in your comments.
‘Elisabeth’s excellent reply’ – where would that be then? I’ve not seen anything that comes close to that description.
I’ll make it easy for you- http://www.jillstanek.com/2010/09/proliferations-9-7-10/#comment-271037
Again, read the meaning and do some self-reflecting.
You might want to take your own advice.